Advertisement

A Framework for QoS-Aware Model Transformation, Using a Pattern-Based Approach

  • Arnor Solberg
  • Jon Oldevik
  • Jan Øyvind Aagedal
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3291)

Abstract

A current trend in software engineering is the changing of software development from being code-centric to become model-centric. This entails many challenges. Traceability between models at different abstraction levels must be managed. Mechanisms for model transformation and code generation must be in place, and these must be able to produce the desired results in terms of derived models and code. A main consideration in this respect is obviously to produce something that provides the expected functionality; another key aspect is to deliver models and code that specify systems that will adhere to the required quality of the provided services. Thus, specification and consideration of quality of service (QoS) when deriving system models are significant. In this paper we describe an approach where QoS aspects are considered when performing model transformations. The approach is pattern-based and uses UML 2.0 [1] as basis for modeling. For specification of QoS, the current submission of the UML profile for modeling QoS [2] is used as the baseline. The transformation specification is aligned with currently available results from the ongoing standardization process of MOF QVT [3][4]. The framework provides mechanisms and techniques for considering QoS throughout a model- driven development process. A key proposal of the approach is to gradually resolve QoS requirements when performing model transformations. The paper also describes a QoS-aware execution platform for resolving QoS requirements at run-time.

Keywords

Model Transformation Transformation Specification Access Control System Object Constraint Language Constraint Platform Specific Model 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
  2. 2.
    UMLTM Profile for Modeling Quality of Service and Fault Tolerance Characteristics and Mechanisms, Revised submission, August 18 (2003), www.omg.org (members only)
  3. 3.
    Meta-Object Facility (MOFTM), www.omg.org
  4. 4.
    MOFTM 2.0 Query, View and Transformation (QVT) RFP, ad/2002-04-10, www.omg.org
  5. 5.
    Revised submission for MOF 2.0 Query/Views/Transformations RFP (ad/2002-04-10), QVT-Merge Group version 1.0 (April 2004), www.omg.org
  6. 6.
    Jacobson, I., Booch, G., Rumbaugh, J.: The Unified Software Development Process. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1999)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rational: The Rational Development process (1996) ISBN 0134529308 Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Component-based Product Line Engineering with UML, Kobra, Addison Wesley (2001) ISBN 0-201-73791-4, http://www.iese.fhg.de/Kobra_Method/
  9. 9.
  10. 10.
    Soley, R.M., Frankel, D.S., Mukerji, J., Castain, E.H.: Model Driven Architecture - The Architecture Of Choice For A Changing World, OMG (2001), http://www.omg.org/mda/
  11. 11.
    OMG, Unified Modeling Language (UMLTM) 1.4 Specification, Object Management Group, Document formal/01-09-67 (2001) Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Common Warehouse MetamodelTM (CWMTM) Specification, v1.1, www.omg.org
  13. 13.
    Trading object service specification (2000), http://www.omg.org/docs/formal/00-06-27.pdf
  14. 14.
    UDDI version 3 specification (2002), http://www.uddi.org/
  15. 15.
    Curbera, F., et al.: Unraveling the Web Services: An introduction to SOAP, WSDL, and UDDI. IEEE Internet computing 6(2) (March/April 2002)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Solberg, A., Oldevik, J., Jensvoll, A.: A generic framework for defining domain-specific models. In: Favre, L. (ed.) Book chapter, UML and the Unified Process, pp. 23–38. IRM Press (2003)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Object Management Group, UMLTM Profile for Schedulability, Performance, and Time Specification (March 2002), www.omg.org
  18. 18.
    [ISO/IEC JTC1/SC21,1995b], QoS– Basic Framework, ISO, Report: ISO/IEC JTC1/SC 21 N9309 Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    [ISO/IEC JTC1/SC7, 1999a], Information Technology - Software product quality - Part 1: Quality model, ISO/IEC, Report: 9126-1, p. 25Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    OMG, UML 1.4 – Chapter 6 - Object Constraint Language (OCL) Specification, Object Management Group, Document formal/01-09-77 (2001) Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    QuA, Quality of Service Aware Component Architecture, An ICT2010-project sponsored by the Norwegian Research Council, http://www.simula.no/project_one.php?project_id=38, http://www.simula.no:8888/QuA
  22. 22.
    Staehli, R., Eliassen, F.: QuA: A QoS-aware Component Architecture. Technical Report Simula 2002-13, Simula Research LaboratoryGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Staehli, R., Eliassen, F., Aagedal, J.Ø., Blair, G.: Quality of Service Semantics for Component-Based Systems. In: Endler, M., Schmidt, D.C. (eds.) Middleware 2003. LNCS, vol. 2672, pp. 153–157. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    FAMILIES, ITEA project ip02009, Eureka Σ! 2023 Programme, http://www.esi.es/en/Projects/Families/
  25. 25.
    UMLTM Profile for Modeling Quality of Service and Fault Tolerance Characteristics and Mechanisms Request for Proposal OMG Document: ad/2002-01-07, www.omg.org
  26. 26.
    OpenQVT, Revised submission, version 1.0 August 18, OMG Document ad/2003- 08-05 (2003)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    QVT-Merge Group, Joint Revised Submission, OMG document ad/04-04-01, http://www.omg.org
  28. 28.
    Aagedal, J.Ø.: Quality of Service Support in Development of Distributed Systems, PhD thesis at University of Oslo, Unipub forlag (2001) ISSN 1501-7710Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Burt et. al: Quality of Service Issues Related to Transforming Platform Independent Models to Platform Specific Models. In: Proceedings of EDOC 2002, Lausanne, Switzerland (2002)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Weis, T., Ulbrich, A., Geihs, K.: Model Metamorphosis. IEEE Software 20(5), 46–51 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Weis, T., et al.: A UML Meta-model for Contract Aware Components. In: Böhling, K.-H., Indermark, K. (eds.) GI-Fachtagung 1973. LNCS, vol. 2185, pp. 442–456. Springer, Heidelberg (1973)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    MODA-TEL IST 2001-37785 deliverable 3.1, Model Driven Architecture Definitions and Methodology, Steinhau R. (ed.) Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    D22 Conceptual Models and UML Profiles, Deliverable of the COMBINE project [34] Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    COMBINE, Component-based Interoperable Enterprise System Development, IST- 1999-20893, http://www.opengroup.org/combine/

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Arnor Solberg
    • 1
  • Jon Oldevik
    • 1
  • Jan Øyvind Aagedal
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.SINTEF ICTOsloNorway
  2. 2.Simula Research Laboratory Martin LingesLysakerNorway

Personalised recommendations